Can Visalia Transit afford to provide ‘free’ Wi-Fi?

Visalia Transit has recently placed stickers that state “free Wi-Fi” on some of the city buses. This begs the question as to whether or not our city can afford the expense of providing free Wi-Fi.

A quick glance at the last published audit shows that in 2012 the average operating expense per rider is $4.52. Yet it shows the average fare per rider is around $1.19.

This makes one ponder why our buses provide free Wi-Fi. The 2012 audit showed no entries for Wi-Fi cost. Are we, the tax payers, funding this free Wi-Fi? If so, why are we providing Wi-Fi on buses when the system is already heavily in the red?

Maybe I’m missing something, perhaps the goal is to increase ridership. If the free Wi-Fi is an extra expense to the tax payers, the city should consider ending it. Can the city not find other uses for the funds being used to provide free Wi-Fi?

The city could surely find other use’s for those funds. Improving some of our congested roads, or improving other vital infrastructure.

Jared Coppola

Visalia

FACTS TO ALLEVIATE CONCERN ABOUT FRACKING

Recent concerns have been raised about water use and oil production in California. However, setting the record straight with some facts should alleviate those concerns.

Due to our geology, hydraulic fracturing in California uses considerably less water than the process does in other states. In fact, total water use by all of California’s hydraulic fracturing wells in 2013 used about the same amount of water to keep one golf course green for a year.

Also, water is a by-product of oil production. Produced water is treated and recycled for energy production and agriculture. This has been a lifeline for Valley growers struggling to keep their crops alive during the drought.

Extremists groups are distorting the truth to push for energy bans. These misguided bans will hurt the entire state by making us more dependent on costly imported oil. However, the Valley will be hurt by threatening thousands of quality oil and gas industry jobs, as well as the billions in vital state and local tax dollars those companies provide annually.

Manuel Cunha Jr.

President, Nisei Farmers League, Fresno

AT THIS MOMENT IN HISTORY

As the candidates for the 2016 presidential race begin to jockey for position, I offer a slightly different perspective.

Our nation is going to have to be actively involved in the fight and defense of humanity against radical Islamic factions. And in this moment of history, in this very moment, to maximize our appearance of strength against this foe, it is the wrong time to elect a woman, any woman for president. Why? Because this menace has absolutely no regard for people, and even less regard for woman. A woman is as qualified as any man for this post, but she would not be taken as seriously as a show of force and strength. These radicals only have a mild respect for the swagger of the male.

And on a side note — please, please, stop all this commentary about this person and that person not having qualifications for the office of president. Of all the people who ran in 2008 for the position, and the people vying for the 2016 election, Barack Hussein Obama was the least qualified. Every, every person who is elected to that particular office is a freshman! Gender, ethnicity, color of your pigmentation, none of that is a factor. You take an oath protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

We don’t need political correctness, we need some damn character, and we need it now!

Ron Long

Visalia

READER EARNS A BOGEY ON AUGUSTA NATIONAL’S TOUGHNESS

A recent reader’s viewpoint suggested making changes to the Masters venue in order to “toughen” the course. Here is another take on that idea.

Augusta National was designed by Robert Tyre Jones Jr. and Dr. Alister MacKenzie, and built in 1933. Both men shared like theories of golf course architecture and several of those are cogent to this topic. A course should be challenging to pros and scratch golfers, while not overwhelming club members or 25 handicappers. There should be a minimum of rough unless it exists naturally (MacKenzie thought that looking for a ball in rank grass was frustrating and unnecessarily held up play). The course should be designed with a mixture in the difficulty of the holes.

Nevertheless, changes were made to Augusta to mitigate the surge in technology and first-rate golfers. For example, as pointed out by Daniel Wexler, lengthening the holes “represents at best a push in the course’s battle to defend itself against modern equipment.” In course, the layout was made longer, from the original 6,700 yards to 7,040 yards in 1980, and at present, measures 7,435 yards.

Jordan Spieth’s 2015 Masters score of -18 was remarkable. However, Jack Nicklaus shot a -17 to win the 1965 event, and Tiger Woods scored a -18 in 1997. In contrast, Zach Johnson’s +1 was good enough to don the green jacket in 2007. So scoring, at least in the past 50 years and with varying yardages, seems to be fairly consistent. In earlier times, Gene Zarazen’s -6 score in the 1935 Masters was a winner, largely on the back of a 235 yard four wood second shot double eagle on the par five 15th in the final round. Even with older equipment, the forerunner golfers could hit for distance with accuracy.

In the photo golf book, “Classic Shots,” Thomas Friedman writes, “The important thing is not what you score on one hole. It’s the score you turn in at the end of the round.” On any given course, each player faces the same challenges as do the others, no matter if the venue is Augusta National or Valley Oaks. Regardless of the length of a hole or course, the height of the rough, the number of hazards, or the speed of the greens, the bottom line is the best score wins.